JHirdYour words:"Laws need to introduced into our society...

JHird

Your words:
"Laws need to introduced into our society whereby people such as yourself can be brought to task for inciting public unrest by deceptive means." and

"However it become extremely damaging to our community when we allow extreme left views such as yours [Ideal's]. Because for the most part these views are not views but lies protected under the false banner of freedom of expression."

What is worse, questioning the motives of those that govern us, when there is reason to do so (reason given below), or allowing ourselves to be led blindy into circumstances where the deception, usually resulting in a severe cost to many, is only for the gain of those in power? In this respect the phrase "power corrupts and total power corrupts totally" was not a line from Alice in Wonderland but from a factual view of history.

You also say:
"Not only are these statements wrong - but they are blatenet lies. Not one shred of factual evidence - not one."

There is also a clear lack of evidence as to the cause of the WTC 1&2 and WTC7 collapses, which is maybe why 357 engineers are currently refuting the official version of WTC 1 & 2 by NIST, which has been responsible for the official investigation into the issue.

In respect of the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 1000-5), interim report,into WTC7, by any measure you like to use, the investigation has lacked scientific rigor (ie fact):

1. This document doesn't seek to determine the why. It has a predetermined context of "The load conditions induced by aircraft impact and the extensive fires on September 11, 2001, which triggered the collapse of the WTC towers, fall outside the norm of design loads. pp xxxiv

2. This is not an investigation of evidence, but a consideration of hypotheses based on the above context. (One can't say much more than this is seriously mickey mouse). "And these hypotheses may be modified, amended or even changed" (see below) ... are you serious!.

From the NIST Document:
"The current NIST working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 is described in the June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (Volume 1, page 17, as well as Appendix L), as follows:

An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;

Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, as the large floor bays were unable to redistribute the loads, bringing down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and

Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7, that were much thicker than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements." (from Executive Summary)

3. What credibility can such a document have? The answer in the disclaimer:

"Use in Legal Proceedings:
No part of any report resulting from a NIST investigation into a structural failure or from an investigation under the National Construction Safety Team Act may be used in any suit or action for damages arising out of any matter
mentioned in such report (15 USC 281a; as amended by P.L. 107-231)".

Reference:
National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 1000-5
Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1000-5, 1,054 pages (June 2004)
CODEN: NSPUE2
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON: 2004


JHird, if this does not provide substance to DOUBT (not conjure conspiracy theories but at least keep an open mind) I can only summise that some just don't DO doubting.

This is my last contribution ... just wanted to contribute, not become involved.

cheers
marz